‘A violation of human rights’: federations push back on anti-doping investigations proposal
2JPKRMM Analyst Women Looking At KPI Data On Computer Screen
(Image credit: Alamy Stock Photo)
An FEI proposal to demand information or articles relating to anti-doping investigations is a “violation of human rights” and goes too far, it has been claimed.
In the final draft of rule changes published by the FEI is a proposal that would allow the federation at any point to “make a written demand to an applicable person to provide the FEI and/or the integrity unit with any information, record, article or thing in their possession or control that the FEI reasonably believes may evidence or lead to the discovery of evidence of a non-doping violation”.
The applicable person would have to provide the record or information “immediately, where practical to do so, or within such other time as may be set by the FEI and/or the integrity unit”, and would “waive and forfeit any rights, defences and privileges provided by any law in any jurisdiction to withhold any information, record, article or thing requested”.
Failure to comply, or attempts to damage, alter or destroy the information, would be a breach of FEI rules.
As is the case with all proposed rule changes, this was sent to national federations and stakeholders for comment.
The Belgian equestrian federation said: “‘Request access to any information or record (such as personal devices)’. This goes too far. We oppose. This is a violation of human rights.”
British Equestrian (BEF) said that although the investigative powers set out are “beneficial in enforcing integrity matters”, it is “concerned that the broad nature of this waiver may be unenforceable in some circumstances”.
“In the UK, for example, certain statutes provide that an individual may not contract out of their statutory rights. It would be helpful if the FEI could confirm that the breadth of the waiver in this rule will not undermine the consent being given.”
The BEF proposed that the addition of “save where it would be contrary to national laws” be added before the reference to waiving and forfeiting rights.
The German federation agreed the rule would be “an infringement of human rights”, adding: “If nothing else, we are sure that this rule will not stand if put to trial in Germany.” The Dutch, Swiss and Swedish federations are all opposed to the idea.
Solicitor Hannah Bradley, of The Equine Law Firm, told H&H this is “one of the most interesting” proposed rule changes.
“Such wide-ranging powers of investigation are somewhat novel,” she said. “The right to access such a wide range of potentially sensitive documentation or personal items is usually the subject of a court order or warrant in legal proceedings, recognising the potential intrusion to an individual’s private life. The description of items the FEI could potentially demand access to is vague, and it could include access to e-mail accounts or data stored on a mobile device.
“Some governing bodies such as the FEI may face inherent challenges in bringing investigations because having access to documents that may establish any charge is dependent upon the willingness of the athlete to share documents. The FEI clearly has a legitimate and reasonable purpose in investigating potential cases of doping violations. On the other hand, the European Convention on Human Rights provides that individuals have a right to a private life, and it could be argued that these wide-ranging powers infringe upon that right.
“Athletes should be aware that they could soon be subject to this rule, and that records that they previously thought to be private may not remain so.”
The FEI, which had said its lawyers had recommended the change, responded to the feedback by stating: “While there are some concerns raised, it is not against human rights to have the proposed provisions (many other international federations have similar, many even stronger provisions). To have the necessary tools to gather information and evidence to legally prosecute cases, it is an important element to have such provisions. We therefore suggest to maintain the initial proposal.”
You might also be interested in:
Ban for rider who ‘ran away’ and ‘escaped’ from anti-doping sample collection
‘Dressage should not resemble a circus show’: proposal to allow glitter on horses sparks debate
Subscribe to Horse & Hound magazine today – and enjoy unlimited website access all year round
TOPICS
